37 of 50 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Every American Should See This Film!!!, October 3, 2004
I just finished watching the film DC 9/11, and I was very impressed with it. Granted, it is a film that is made to present President Bush and his administration in the best light possible. This film definitely presents Bush as heroic in his handling of the 9/11 crisis. But, in a way, how else could Bush be portrayed? Put aside for a moment America's division over Bush's actions later in his administration (Iraq, etc.). Think back to Bush's performance as President in the week of the 9/11 attack, which is the subject of this film. I think any reasonable individual would say that Bush handled the situation extremely well, and was able to rally the nation to a firm resolve to recover from the tragedy.
Plus, when one thinks about it, a film that centers on an important leader can either present the person as very heroic or very villainous. There are few films that find the ability to present a person's flaws and virtures (Patton would be one of the few). Look at films like Thirteen Days (which portrays Kennedy as being near godlike in his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis) or Nixon (which presents that President as pratically the devil incarnate).
There are several reasons why I think that every American should see this film:
1) Despite the film's pro-Bush slant, the film is actually very accurate in its potrayal of what happened in the White House during 9/11 and in the week following the attack. The best source available on this subject is Bob Woodward's book, Bush at War. The book details the players, actions, and decisions of the Bush administration from the day of the attacks to the military operations in Afghanistan. Woodward had full access to White House documents and personnel to write his book. As anyone who is familiar with Woodward's work knows, he is not anyone political patsy. In fact, he later wrote a book, Plan of Attack, which has been touted by both Bush supporters and anti-Bush people as THE book to read on the administration's decisions leading up to the invasion of Iraq. The reason why I bring up Woodward's book, Bush at War, is because this film's potrayal of events line up extremely well with the facts laid out in Woodward's book, and with other documented accounts of the events. Therefore, despite its biases, the film is a great, factual look at how the President and his administration handled the crisis, which is a vital story for Americans to know about our recent history.
2) The film also give clear indications about how the Bush administration came to the course it took in handling the war on terror. The military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Patriot Act, and other elements, are clearly forshadowed in the scenes involving meetings between the President and the National Security Council. As President Bush himself told his people in one of these meetings, "we are fighting an unconventional war against a very different kind of enemy. We have to start thinking in unconventional ways." The film also shows through these scenes the disputes within the administration over how broad the war should be prosecuted (Powell and Rumsfeld and their disagreements over Iraq, for example), and the weaknesses in America's intelligence community before 9/11. For example, in one scene, President Bush asks the directors of the CIA and FBI why they were not communicating with each other about the suspected terrorists effectively, one of them replied, "well, sir, our computers don't network with each other." Bush looked like he was about explode with frustration.
3) Timothy Bottoms did a fantastic job in potraying President Bush. He lacks Bush's pronounced Texas accent, but that was probably a decision on his part and that of the filmmakers to avoid any chance of his performance coming off as some comical impersonation. Instead, Bottoms performs the role of President Bush with a focus on copying his demeanor (hand jestures, posture, facial expressions) mixed in with a focus on the President's emotions and mind set. You get to see the personal side of Bush in those days, since the filmmakers interviewed Bush and those close to him to get a sense of his thoughts and feelings at that time. It really shows Bush as someone who developed a resolve to do everything he could to prevent another 9/11. One can argue about how he went about fighting the war on terror later, but few can doubt that his actions come from an internal impulse to never see another day like 9/11. A masterful performance that should have earned Bottoms an Emmy, and would have if it were not for the political bias of those in Hollywood.
This film masterfully captures an important moment in history through the point of view of the leadership in America the time it happened.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
23 of 31 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
What an interesting look at 9/11, August 3, 2004
What a shame that Amazon.com reviewer Bret Fetzer chose to look at the film in a political context rather than review it for the performances and technical achievement.
I first saw this film on Showtime and was pleasantly surprised by the performances, particularly those of Penny Johnson Jerald (of FOX's "24") as Condoleeza Rice, and Mary Gordon Murray as Laura Bush.
The intersplicing of real 9/11 footage with the filmmakers' shots is well done. And, while the end of the film could be seen as a campaign poster, the editing of the footage returns us to the reality that 3000 people lost their lives on September 11, 2001... which really is the point after all, isn't it?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
23 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Give the President his Props, September 19, 2004
It is only fair to aknowledge that DC 9/11 is essentially the way President Bush and the members of his administration tell their story. That said, it is all consistent with the known facts, and even republicans are entitled to express their point of view - particularly about their own actions.
If - make that when - a flattering behind-the-scenes drama is made about the Clinton White House, Clintonites will - rightly - expect it to be taken at face value; at least as long as there is nothing in it that is proven false. Those who disbelieve this portrayal of Bush and Company are entitled to their opinion. But, it is only opinion.
This account is plausible. In my opinion it is accurate. The President deserves recognition for the tremendous burden he has taken on. He has done better than most of us would have - and he has not complained. Laura Bush, Condaleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Karen Hughes and many others portrayed here deserve credit for rising to this tragic occasion. The War on Terror is a greater challenge than any of them expected when they signed on at the Bush White House.
It is amazing that Timothy Bottoms could play a serious George W. after playing him as a likable buffoon on "That's My Bush". The rest of the cast were also excellent. At times I was reminded of some of the better episodes of "The West Wing".
All in all; one side of the story very well told.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
